SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1959 Supreme(All) 52

O. H. MOOTHAM, RAGHUBAR DAYAL, A. P. SRIVASTAVA
PANNA LAL – Appellant
Versus
THE COLLECTOR, ETAH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Brij Lal Gupta, V.K.BURMAN

A. P. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant No. 1 was the owner of some land lying within the Municipal Limits of Kasganj of which the appellant No. 2 was the tenant. The land was acquired under the provisions of the land Acquisition Act for the construction of a Bus stand. The appellant No. 1 filed an objection under Section 5a of the Land Acquisition Act, but it was rejected. The Collector made his award under Sections 11 of the Land Acquisition Act on the 21st of July 1954. On 11-8-1955 the appellants filed an application under Section 18 of the Act requiring a reference to be made to the District Judge. In this appli- cation they alleged that they had come to know of the award only on the 5th of August 1955. By his order, dated 3-11-1955, the collector rejected the application and refused to make the desired reference on the ground that the application was time-barred. The appellants then applied for a rehearing of the matter on the ground that it was not open to the collector to himself consider the question of limitation and that he was bound to make the reference when an application was made to him under Section 18 of the Act. This application was again rejected by the Collect












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top